they're just following the law. they're following a normal course of don -- conduct for a corporation and transparency is the issue. they have to be legally transparent to the shareholders, but by saying we complied with another government subpoena, we followed the law again, it's not -- they don't have to do that. >> a lot of other companies have been part of this don't do that. >> right. the issue here is not whether or not the government gets to know where we are, who do we call, and every single phone data that at&t complies. that's a separate issue. the question is, if you are a consumer of at&t, or if you are a shareholder, here the shareholders own more than $500 million of at&t, they're saying, we want to know what of our personal information are you giving to the government? what of our personal phone -- >> what if they're sworn to secrecy? >> they're not. that's the point. >> wait. i disagree there. >> the national security -- remember when verizon said we couldn't sty veil. that. >> they're not sworn to s